F-111 Aardvark: America's Multirole Death Machine
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 30 ก.ย. 2024
- It tried to be everything to everyone, that didn't work out great...
Got a beard? Good. I've got something for you: beardblaze.com
Simon's Social Media:
Twitter: / simonwhistler
Instagram: / simonwhistler
Love content? Check out Simon's other TH-cam Channels:
Biographics: / @biographics
Geographics: / @geographicstravel
Warographics: / @warographics643
SideProjects: / @sideprojects
Into The Shadows: / intotheshadows
TopTenz: / toptenznet
Today I Found Out: / todayifoundout
Highlight History: / @highlighthistory
Business Blaze: / @brainblaze6526
Casual Criminalist: / thecasualcriminalist
Decoding the Unknown: / @decodingtheunknown2373
1 point few people ever seem to believe is that the F111 destroyed more iraqi armour than the A10's in Desert storm.
Plus the a10 has been involved in more friendly fire cases than any other fighter
@@nathanhough8156 pretty good reason for that, when you're being overrun and you call danger close and closer just to save your ass, yeah, they delivered exactly what was requested and required...
Well the A10 was obsolete before it even flew.
@@nathanhough8156 the A-10 isn’t a fighter it’s a strike aircraft
@@hattrickFPV Spoken like someone who has never seen a single Warthog strafe and destroy an entired armored column in one pass. And bring its pilot back alive.
Nothing else can do that.
When Australia went to East Timor to protect the hand over, we moved 2 F111 to RAAF Tindall. That was enough to discourage Indonesia from any ideas of interfereing. Just 2 aircraft! The F111 definitely didn't suck
You give too much credit to the platform. A US Aircraft carriers in the region, a demonstration of Australia's third-gen night vision goggles by special forces to an Indonesian Commander, and high-quality intelligence gathering also helped keep things quiet.
and yet when they leave - F111's... go figure.@@LetterboxFrog
100% right mate the indos hated the fact we had the pig.
Anyone who thinks it sucked has no clue
The Indonesian defence minister later said it was the presence of the pigs that discouraged any intervention. Unambiguously attributing their restraint to the F-111s stationed at Tindall.
Lots of relatively minor inaccuracies but overall a fair overview. I was a Vark pilot with nearly 1,000 hours in the jet before moving on to the F-16, and it was a great aircraft for its mission of low level, long range bombing. It was amazingly fast at all altitudes. And, something many don't realize, it could pull 7.3Gs (clean with a partial fuel load), but not for long without bleeding a ton of airspeed. How I miss those days...
Lots of errors for sure.
Thank you for your service. Enjoy some aviation art. Pallet Colorato
I feel it doesnt get enough justice for what it did and was. It has always been my favorite. B1 also. Something about em.
Not so minor.
@@johnnunn8688 Like what?
The F-111 didn't suck. It's one of the best aircraft of it's generation, and truly outstanding as a ground attack platform and a capable EAW platform as well. The whole "one fighter for every mission" thing that McNamara wanted was stupid. That's the kind of thing that when you get lucky and it works that way, like with the F-4 Phantom or to a lesser degree the F-16, you don't look the gift horse in the mouth and you count your blessings. Setting out to build a unicorn from scratch just makes no sense.
I now take this guy as maybe knowing not so much about this aircraft which begs the question what does he actually know about any aircraft?
He said only the Navy varient sucked, which is true.
@@The_Random_Aussie Yeah and they make purposefully misleading title cards and stuff to bait idiots like me into engaging with content I otherwise wouldn't engage with.
F-16 is only used by the US Air Force, not the Navy or Marines.
@@rayjames6096 I didn't mention the F-16 as being an aircraft that can do it all because it's in use by all branches like the F-4 was. I mentioned it because it can and does fill almost every role you can ask of a tactical jet, and it does them well similar to the F-4. About the only roles the F-4 prominently carried out that the F-16 doesn't also fulfill are Fleet Defender and I don't think the F-16 is used that extensively in reconnaissance. However as a fighter, CAS, strike fighter, SEAD platform, and as an interceptor, the F-16 can and does do all those jobs and it does them well.
The F111 turned out to be a excellent strike aircraft.
IT'S STILL MY FAV JET
Still not a 'fighter'.
@@kellywellington7122 Neither is F-117
@@kellywellington7122 That's why its called a multirole aircraft.
Better then a10 in every aspect that actually matters
You neglected to mention that the crew capsule, used as an escape system, would allow pilots to ejects at speeds greater then Mach 1 safely…. It was a revolutionary escape system
WOW I DID'T KNOW THAT NOW I HAVE ANOTHER REASON FOR IT BEING MY FAV JAT
Not only that, but they also could do a 0/0 ejection, And become a self contained life raft if an over water ejection was required.
@@WilliamEades_Frostbite yup…. It really prioritizes safety and survival of the crew throughout the flight and engagement envelopes. In a way we don’t see today.
They had reliability issues with the parachute subsystems though, iirc.
...when it worked. My father was a flight surgeon at Cannon AFB in the late 70s. Cannon was home to a squadron of F-111s. Being a flight surgeon one of my father's responsibilities was forensics whenever fatalities resulted from mishaps or crashes. Well, whatever forensics were possible on what was left of the human crew, which frequently wasn't much. One incident I remember him being called out to was an F-111 that lost power and engines. The crew could have ejected at a safe altitude (safer meaning higher, rather than lower, because if something goes wrong the crew might be able to fix it in time to save themselves.) However at the time their aircraft was over a heavily populated part of the city and to eject there would mean essentially guaranteeing casualties on the ground. So they stuck with their plane, now a glider, long enough to guide it over an unpopulated area then ejected. They ejected at around 600 feet which should have been high enough to give the parachute time to open but it didn't deploy properly and they had little to no time to do anything about it so their ejection capsule hit the ground at whatever was terminal velocity for such an object. My father said that it hit sitting straight up due to the trailing tatters of the failed parachute, and the entire thing was squashed so flat it was little taller than his knees. The crew were turned into mush and there was little in the way of forensics my father could do at the crash site aside from gathering blood and tissue samples. From the velocity of the impact the mangled bodies of the crewmen exsanguinated completely in one big splash and he was unable to get even a milliliter of blood out of what was left; the rest of it was saturating the capsule and the ground for at least six feet around the impact site. He said that it spoke highly of the courage and dedication of the crew that they risked riding the aircraft to be able to guide it to a more or less safer place to crash but lost so much altitude in the process that when the chute failed it guaranteed they would have no time to do a damn thing about it and they paid with their lives. According to my father, at the time the F-111 was known for lots of issues like that where things simply quit working like they should, at the worst possible times, and among the medical staff anyway the aircraft was considered something of a death trap. But then he and his peers were surgeons, not flight engineers, so what did they know?
It says a lot that when my father got home from that callout he got drunk and stayed that way all night long (on Ouzo, ugh), something he'd not done since his partying medical school days, and something I'd never myself seen him do before. He was by civilian profession an adrenaline-junkie trauma surgeon and had worked on thousands of patients with horrendous wounds of almost every conceivable type. But, he said, he'd never seen a human body before reduced to a pink homogeneous mush that had to be practically scraped out of the remains of the capsule with spatulas. He told me that not once before in his career had he ever seen anything so shocking it made him gag. That one made him gag. He was only barely able to retain his stomach contents for the first hour or so dealing with the crash. But eventually he got used to it and was okay. A human being can get used to anything if given long enough.
This video is a ways off point.
It was never meant to be a maneuvering dogfighter at all.
It actually did better than the F-14 for nearly all of its Phoenix missile/fleet defense duties.
Regardless, it was always a ground attack aircraft for the Air Force, and a superb long range nuclear bomber.
It was truly a fantastic and unmatched aircraft.
It did many things, but it never sucked.
_>It was never meant to be a maneuvering dogfighter at all._
But it was, the acceptance phase came much later in the development.
@@nickkorkodylas5005 No, it was not.
@@gort8203 It's okay to be retarded, the problem is to insist you are not when people point it out:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_F-111_Aardvark#Early_requirements
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_F-111_Aardvark#Tactical_Fighter_Experimental_(TFX)
@@nickkorkodylas5005 Wikipedia is where misinformed mini-minds seem to gain much of your shallow misunderstanding. You need to read a little deeper, yet you call me retarded. You must be so proud of your intellect.
Actually, I just skimmed the Wikipedia article and it seemed to make my point rather than yours, so it seems your reading comprehension or understanding of aircraft maneuvering is what is at issue.
@@gort8203 Ahhh yes, the ol' downie mumbling "hurrrr durrrrr interceptors are not supposed to be maneuverable". Here's an extra tip to match your chromosome, the MiG-21 and the Gripen were both designed primarily as interceptors and they turned out far more agile than the vast majority of fighter aircraft of their era. One of the points of having a VGW is to be able to retain maneuverability at a higher spectrum of speeds. The OP's original statement that _" it was always a ground attack aircraft "_ is almost as wrong as your mom's initiative to keep drinking during pregnancy. Your insistence on his second most mentally deficient claim that _"It was never meant to be a maneuvering dogfighter at all. because durka durpity derp MUH LUNG REING FLIT DIFENS"_ is pure cope. Please accept your neurological deficiencies and seek professional help, don't let the tragical accident of your birth to keep you down.
I seem to remember that when tensions were high between Australia and Indonesia, the leaders in Jakarta said "Do you realise that the Australians have a plane that can put a bomb through this table?".
So - it was expensive, but making Australia SCARY? Priceless.
true, and the story goes that when an Australian defense minister decided that the F111 had had its day a squadron leader conducted a night bombing raid on the ministers office, apparently the targeting camera imagery was good enough not only to put a bomb through the ministers office window if they had been inclined to do so but the objects on his desk were identifiable... needless to say when shown that imagery the ministers opinions did a complete 180 and upgrade funding was fast tracked...🤣🤣
Australians live in a landmass where everything from the climate to the funky little egg laying mammals can kill you. When you analyze that, mix it with their military's track record and you'd be a fool to not be scared of them.
Australia is always scary. But only if you're visiting.
The quote is usually attributed to former Indonesian defence minister Benny Murdani, who told Kim Beazley (Oz Defence Minister) that - when others became upset with Australia during Indonesian cabinet meetings - Murdani would tell them "Do you realise the Australians have a bomber that can put a bomb through that window on to the table here in front of us?"
@@magics902 After the first few bites from a funnel web or an eastern brown or a taipan, you start to develop immunity to the venom, provided of course, you survive the first bite.
The belly landing in Australia became the first "carrier certified landing crew"...
At the time Indonesia had a Russia and China leaning Government (Sukarno) that occasionally played lip service to claiming Australia as Indonesian territory. They had MiG 21's. The F-111 shut them up. It was unstoppable. It had the range. It would have wiped out anything we needed to if we had to.
-Ukraine has proven that there is not such thing as a defense with 'defensive weapons'. You need a club to hurt they other guy badly so he thinks twice about trying anything.
@@williamzk9083 and this has what to do with what I said? Absolutely not a damn thing, take your meds and move on
@@williamzk9083 It was also not the same F111 that the Navy would have got and the Air Force got, When Australia bought their version they requested that a decent chunk of the plane be modified.
@@DevinEMILE The Australian F-111 had a greater wing span and therefore greater range.
The F111 was ahead of its time. During its inception and early fielding, engine tech was still immature. Imagine we put modern turbo fans or adaptive cycles in the F111
They used the F111's engines in the F14 early on. They didn't work out as well in the 14 due to the intakes. In certain conditions the engines would stall. The first F14 female pilot crashed and was killed, partly due to this. She took too tight a turn on final, and stalled one engine. She throttled up and pulled the stick up when she should have kept the nose down, and the A/C stalled. They had to eject at the last moment. Back seater made it, but she ejected straight into the water and was killed. Had she kept the nose down, she probably could have recovered from the stall. It was a known issue with the F14-A. They went to a larger GE engine less susceptible to compressor stall because of this issue.
Yeah its heir is called the F35 and its still a fucking shit mule.
@@novaseline4u The biggest contributing factor in that crash was the LT Hultgreen would have failed flight school had she been a male. Political correctness cost her her life.
Now Imagine putting engines in a plane that worked to start with.
How do you justify the Opposite?
@@Kriss_L Truth. They were in too big a hurry to put a female pilot into that plane. She was not ready.Maybe she never would have been, not for a 14 anyway. All she had to do was bring the nose down and get wings level and she could have recovered it. Or never make such a sharp turn to begin with. Both very basic errors according to the other pilots.
The F-111 performed well every time it was called up. Great plane.
Aside from a couple of very unfortunate events when introduced it had a sterling career 👍👍👍
It was the top tank buster in the Gulf War.
@@steelytemplar Came here to say exactly this one minute later. It also cracked a ton of hardened aircraft shelters and even had an air to air kill (well, sort of...).
Not the first forays in Vietnam. The LARA, low altitude radar array (iirc) erred in reading the karst terrain on those initial sorties, resulting in unacceptably high losses.
@@zd1322 6 where lost.
I've always been a fan of your work Simon but whoever wrote this for you doesn't seem to have much understanding of the f-111 and its role.
He sure doesn't should of done his research. USAF records show, That after 500K flight hours the F-111 had the lowest accident rate, lowest major accident rate, and LOWEST FATALITY rate of any fighter built since the 1950's (ref. Wings, April 1992).
@@ILSRWY4 and they also show that Joe Biden, a nonce, child molester was voted as the most popular president of all time, with more adults voting than there are adults in the United States.
This is just one example of many of his surface level understanding of the topics her covers.
When was the f-111 ever a fighter? Is it not a bomber?
@@JamiefromHali
Yes. They called it a fighter for political reasons.
I don't think you'll find many Aussies that think the F-111 "sucked".
I was at Amberley for their first air show. The announcer had everyone watching 2 Mirages taking off in opposite directions so we're all watching the strip. Then without warning 3 F-111s came in from behind and roared overhead. Then pulled straight up with a dump and burn. I have no idea how low they were but I felt like I could just about count the rivets on the belly. Loved the bird from that day on.
Doesn’t mean it was a good aircraft.
At the last Brisbane Riverfire that featured F-111s we stood on a bridge over the F3 Freeway at Wolloongabba to watch. The planes flew along the freeway right over our heads with the afterburners going. I could feel the heat they were so close.
The dump'n'burn was always popular at the sky shows in Townsville.
@@johnnunn8688 but it was
it was probly the best aircraft we will ever have. the f35 is next level tho
Say what you like. I was stationed in Korat, Thailand in 1974. One day, just as the sun was coming up, I was out by the revetments watching planes coming back from missions. Suddenly an F-111 appeared, wings out, floating quietly down just above the tree tops.. It was the most evil looking thing I'd ever seen in the air. I thought to myself "Thank God it's on our side."
I worked on the F-111. In its day it was the best interdiction aircraft in the world. This guy has no clue.
That's what I remember about it. Someone in the Pentagon didn't want it so it became an orphan.
As a kid I used to look at pictures of that aircraft and it's still one of the most beautiful aircraft I've never seen.
Compare it to the F35... the difference between the mona lisa and one of picasso's disasters 😄😄😄😁😁👍👍👍👍💕
Yeah, his video on the A10 was overly praiseful. Whoever writes for this channel seems to believe the lies told by Sprey and his fighter mafia buddies.
Next they'll make a video shitting on the F35
Oh wait they already did.
I did, also.
Thank you for your service. Enjoy some aviation art. Pallet Colorato
Title intended to be sarcastic
I was an industrial engineer for the F-111 Depot maintenance at McClellan AFB. Very impressive aircraft. In the film "Wings over the Gulf" a general said, "Sending F-15/F-16a to take out a bridge in Iraq was hit or miss. When I sent the F-111s I knew it was a done deal."
Worked there as well in the FD.. Once I got back stateside... Isnt MAC private now?
Finally! As an Aussie I always loved the F-111, and seeing the dump and burn in person was always insane
A
The Friday night dump and burn at Avalon. 🔥
Me: "Oh, look. It's suddenly summertime!" *melts*
I remember the dump and burn over Sydney at the closing of the 2000 Olympics. 10pm and the sky looked like sunrise...
I could see the glow from the Riverfire dump and burn from 30km away
Over goldie for the races was a highlight of those weekends
In RAAF service the F-111 gave Australia unparalleled capability in the region. It was the best bomber, ground attack, maritime strike, and interdiction platform south east Asia/Pacific region. It was a true beast. And there really is nothing that exists today that can replace the loss in capability.
Best aircraft nickname:
The electronic warfare version was called the Spark 'Vark.
The reason they were pulled from service was sealing in the fuel tanks. It turned out the be carcinogenic getting ground crews in there to repair the tanks.
@@robf6389 It would be nice to believe that concern for the health of personnel was the only factor which forced the RAAFs decision re. retiring the Pig, but the simple fact of the matter is that they were always an expensive aircraft to operate and the C-model airframes were nearing 35 years old when the decision was made to retire them because maintenance costs were up in the stratosphere by that stage and the G-models wouldn't have been much cheaper to run either. Retiring the only dedicated long-range strategic strike platform in the Asia-Pacific region also suited our geopolitical purposes at a time when there was a focus on strengthening trade ties with our neighbours to the north.
@@sixstringedthing I hate to say it but you look at the records and most F111's airframes were replaced at least once, if not twice. My uncle was one of many sheet metals shops cutting out parts for the new airframes in the 90's, This was part of their expensive maintenance costs, also bonded panels made of asbestos.The redesign and replacement of swing wing joint.
Too true mate. Used to scare the Indonesians.
The Aardvark can fly fast enough to peel paint off of it.
It has a confirmed by simply out-performing a pursuing aircraft at low level.
My father rebuilt an American F-111 after it belly landed sometime in the 70's or early 80's. The USAF was ready to write-it-off. He wasn't ready to scratch one of his birds off the roster. So they spent a lot of weeks of EXTRA work to put it back in working order. His team did just that.
I call jibber jabber.
F-111 was one of the first Hypersonic Aircraft the airspeed indicator went up in 200 mile per hr increments from 0 - mach 56 no one knows the top speed because they would accelerate until they came apart.
Hypersonic is over four times the speed of sound. It wasn’t close to hypersonic
@@mitchell7309 5 times
I worked on F-111’s in the late 80’s. My aircraft was F-111D 68-0122 “Fireball Annie” she was incredible!
Wow..👍👍👍great stuff
Fireball Annie -- yes, sir, I remember that.
I worked F-111E's and EF-111A's in the late 80's too. USAF stationed at RAF Upper Heyford UK. Thank you for your service!
I'm curious, the D's had a reputation for poor avionics reliability. Did you see any of that?
I worked Fb's and F's as an ECM Puke my entire career and was part of the Pave Tac Upgrade Team at the 48th.
It did not suck. It was very good at the ultimate missions the USAF had for it.
Did you even watch the video
@@warbound1 - Yes the entire thing. What you may be missing, is that the thumbnail for this video says, "Why it sucks". The aircraft did not suck.
@@JDFloyd
I think that was a cheeky little joke to yank the yankee-yanks.
All jet craft suck if you think about it ;)
It was a case of an airplane not being good at at least one of it's intended roles. It was supposed to be a "multirole fighter" and while it was very good at various other roles, it was never much of a fighter. Maybe this was because they thought missiles would do all the work, but I've noticed there was a trend of ridiculously large fighters in the 1960's. MiG-23 and F-14 for example (the F-14 was undeniably a good fighter, but also very expensive to operate).
@@ressljs - My experience as a Naval Aviator (NFO), is that any "Multirole Aircraft" with more than 2-mission assignments, did not do more than one of them well. The F-111 series excelled at 1-thing, All-weather attack, but was very good at its 2nd role ECM - which by the way was the same as my aircraft, the A-6. The McNamara concept that it would be good as an All-Weather, Fleet Air Defense aircraft was misguided from the beginning, and thankfully the evaluations proved that. However, there was a silver lining in that the F-14 project learned several lessons without having to spend R&D money.
2500 hours in them. Flew F-111a/d/e and FB's. Absolutely nothing on the planet that could out run them on the deck.
Add to that night, all weather, low level penetration and attack for the time nothing like it.
Thank you for your service!
I'm glad to hear they were so capable.
Indeed, after the USAF retired them they banned them from Exercise Red Flag (the RAAF being the only international operators of the F-111) because no one could intercept them. IMO the F-111 design is/was the best looking of the jet era, Spitfire being the best looking of the propeller era.
I was under the impression that the f104 was faster at low level although they only briefly served at the same time.
@@Lucas12v The Starfighter did not have the fuel capacity -- the 111 could carry about 30k internally.
F111 look gorgeous doing it too!
Flew F-4s, A-6, F-15E and had an orientation flight at Nellis AFB in an F-111F during a fighter weapons school graduation exercise (AKA Red Flag for adults). Quite simply, if you had to go take on the Moscow defenses, this was the best choice. Range, speed, deadly bombing accuracy where unquestioned attributes. The Terrain Following Radar was better than the F-15E in 1994 when I flew both jets. The radar warning receiver was very good. At night or in the weather and at low altitude, the F-111 was dominating. Even in the day, its speed was really impressive.
I totally get the usual click bait headline that it was a failed program, and relative to its “one size fits all for USAF and USN” objective, it was not successful. But if I had to get in a jet and go to Moscow during the Cold War, this was the only choice. I believe it had the lowest combat loss record over its career.
I only flew it for 2.5 hours, but it was one of the highlights of my career.
Interested to hear how you flew the Phantom , intruder , and the eagle .
@@johnmilner5485 F-4E/G at George 86-89, then Nellis in 1992-5. EA-6B at Whidbey 90-92, again 95-97. Was assigned to Weapons School at Nellis and flew F-15E there as guest help with a local checkout. Was not ever fully qualed on the Eagle but got enough time to work Lantirn and Radar. Was on flying status with 422 TES, 561 TFS as well at Nellis. Good (no great) times. I think I recall an F-4 pilot named Milner. That you?
Unparalelled aircraft. We saw them many times in Oz, the nighttime fuel dump burn at events was astounding. They were the most crucial aircraft in Desert Storm.
In the late 1970's we built the ALQ-131 radar jamming pod that would be on supersonic aircraft. Ther were concerns that the pod would overheat above Mach 1 so we had a F-111 fly at Mach 1+ for about a half hour. The crew loved the flight because it was the longest supersonic flight they had ever done. By the end of the flight the pod temp had only risen four degrees.
That's fk all, when I was a kid, I made an Airfix model F-111 all on my own.😲
At M1 that plane wasn't even close to breathing hard.
@@novaseline4u Got that right...Check out an FB111 SAC arm patch. It carries the saying of MACH 2.5+.
@@WilliamEades_Frostbite Like the F-15C.
I worked parts of The ALQ-131 mid 80's maybe Block 2
The Pig was great, it gave some of our neighbouring countries something to think about. I miss this at airshows for obvious reasons (dump'n'burn).
It was the biggest pos Australia got ducked into buying.
@@Grant80 I don't know what planet you came from Michael, but I've met a few pig pilots over the years. They loved the things. They would get you into trouble... then get you the hell out!
@@dramoth64 the pig is the biggest pos to fly.
@@Grant80 you are clueless.
@@Grant80 how ?
It was ground breaking technology, once the bugs were worked out it went onto a long service life.
In its day, it was the fastest plane in the US inventory aside from the SR71. When the B1-A was in development, the F111 was used as a chase plane because nothing else could catch the B1-A. B1-B is a different story. No longer fast.
Seven years of "Working Bugs Out?"
Compare that to the Service Life and it is as impressive as this Video depicts.
The aircraft actually performed well in Vietnam. A typical strike package might involved a hundred aircraft: tankers, Thunder chief bombers and Phantom escorts, specialist jamers and SEAD aircraft and AWACS. F-111 just went in on their own in deep raids groups as small as 5.
So 'ground breaking' that it has been incorporated into every subsequent fighter aircraft since? No. I suspect that the whole variable geometry wing idea has largely been jettisoned as a waste. The US dabbled with it, and a couple other nations tried it, but it did not flourish and become an inherent part of each and every subsequent aircraft. Instead, a few aircraft were produced and most everybody went back to the fixed/rotor wing mix and variable wing fighters were relegated to the dust bin. I suspect the same will eventually happen with the VTOL fighters. Greater complexity is not always the effective answer, as it tends to include a whole lot more avenues to the proliferation of new problems and eventual breakdown.
@@kellywellington7122 Maverick begs to differ.
F-111s did not fly at 550mph at treetop level like the narrator said, they flew at Mach 1.2 at 200 ft above the ground or tree top level, I should know I'm a fighter pilot United States Air Force and I am very familiar with the F-111 and it was a fantastic aircraft!
9:59 200 ft at 550 mph is what he said, you're saying you're a pilot but you cannot hear words and comprehend them?
@@csonracsonra9962This from somebody that clearly cannot read. 🤦♂️
I was a USAF WSO flying with an RAAF Pilot at Red Flag 1981 pulling 4Gs off target egressing at 100 ft AGL & Mach 1.2. It was the wildest ride ever! We made it in & out, hit the target, and no one touched us.
@@orrishambleton5996 . The F-111 was one heck of an aircraft !
@@csonracsonra9962 Mark 1.2 isn't 550 MPH. Its 920.723 MPH, so yeah the pilot knows what he's talking about.
Congrats to Everyone who is Early and Found this Comment 🎉
Ta
I found it!
Just for the record. RAAF is spoken as R double A F. Great yarns across your channels. 🇦🇺🐨🐨🇦🇺
I crewed 72-0403 from Dec 80 to Dec 82. She was the first Pave TAC bird for the 493d FS and had an all black bottom. No markings. She never failed my aircrew nor me! Called her the "Can Do!"
Was Pave Tack the camera on a swivel ball used for targeting? Wasn't this used against the Russian transport aircraft in Libya in Operation Torrey Canyon?
I search for these comments.
@@machstem6390 Then search for the ones calling it a piece of shit when the most advanced thing they've probably flown is a kite.
@@jimtrela7588 Jim it was a targeting system for payload delivery
The F111 belly landing happened in 2006, not 2016. And either way, the incident could not have influenced the RAAF's decisions in 1992.
WITH A RANGE OF 6750 KM IT WOULD BE HANDY FOR THE US NAVY'S AIR CRAFT CARRIER'S RIGHT NOW .SINCE CHINA 'S HYPERSONIC MISSILE MAKE IT TO DANGEROUS FOR FLAT TOP'S TO GET WITHIN THE RAGE OF IT'S CURRENT FIGHTER'S
@@robot336 why are you yelling?!
@@robot336 Dude, not so loud, I'm still hungover.
Poor editing, I'm guessing. RAAF had a number of fatal crashes between 1977 and 1992 (and a couple after then), so maybe the script originally referred to those?
The tomcat was also not named for Tom Cruise (although I suspect it was kind of a weak-landed joke).
Im VERY upset that you FAILED to feature the best accidental design "feature" of the F111. The famed "dump and burn", a highlight of most airshows when it was flying. The fuel jettison port was located between the two engines. So pilots would "dump" jet fuel, ignite the afterburners, and "burn" the fuel, creating a spectacular fireball, and a spectacular waste of fuel. Lots of video's of this.
This is pretty cool to see, the F-111 and F-14 could both dump and burn.
That sounds awesome 🤓
Only the RAAF did it with any regularity, no tactical use whatsoever kinda like the aircraft. They constantly leaked, fragile maintenance intensive and unreliable a complete pig of an aircraft.
Most spectacular at night too.
I saw a RAAF Aardvark do that at an airshow at Andersen AFB, Guam back in the late 1980s . . . It WAS pretty impressive.
The F-111 was arguably the most important plane of the Gulf War, it ended up destroying twice as many tanks as the A-10 Warthog, a plane designed specifically to bust tanks, despite being sent on half as many sorties.
It’s amazing what a two band crew and their targeting system can do
Always sounds like that until you take into account that 44% of all Aardvarks were sent on “tank hunting” missions during the Air War before the a10 saw wide use. Plus most a10s still didn’t hunt tanks rather they were sent to an area and attacked whatever they happened to find and helped ground troops. Sometimes that included attacking the British
@@LaikaTheG british troops operating with no comms while not following proper identification sops... not really the inanimate airframes fault.
@@LaikaTheG True to a degree. Interdiction was the F-111's primary duty during the Gulf war and that involved cutting off enemy forces from their supply lines and then eliminating the enemy. But they only flew around 2500 sorties vs the A-10's 8100.
@@g00gleisgayerthanaids56 Yes it was the problem of the A-10 at the time the A-10 lacked good optic and targeting, the best they had were litteral binocular in the cockpit. This was a major factor in Blue on Blue acccident, it is far easier to not misidentify a force, when you have good sensors. Something that is pretty important when doing CAS, as the principle of CAS mission is to react to situation with often partial, and sometimes even false information. In hindsight it is mind boggling that a plane designed for CAS didn't had better sensors. If a modernised CAS plane is designed again it would proably be better to take inspiration from the F-111 than the A-10.
We called it tank plinking. I flew right seat in the F-111F/G and the EF-111A. During Desert Storm the F’s were given kill boxes and the WSO would search for tanks/armor with the Pave Tack then guide the bombs on target. We noticed that little black dots began running away before the bombs hit. After the war debriefs revealed that the armor crews heard the GBU guidance fins clacking as it guided in. That gave them warning. The armor would still be destroyed of course. The reason for the clack clack clack … was the full deflection guidance commands.
That's funny! I'll tell my dad about it. He was WSO in A's at Takhli and F's a Mt. Home. Hey, he got tossed a shack once, in the F out of Nellis. All iron bombs back then. Was rated #2 WSO in the fleet when he retired because he LOVED the aircraft and the job. 100 Missions N Vietham patch at Udorn in the RF-4C too (nav). He said the transition to the 111 was a natrual fit coming from that mission. Down low, all radar. I used to watch him draw his radar predictions at home in Mt. Home. He said he did the same thing in combat. Retired just as the F's went to England (for timeframe).
We've watched some Desert Storm recounts and there were some comments about equipment problems. INS gyro failures, this and that acting up. Dad commented "For us, there were no problems at all. Everything just worked." Obviosuly because the airframes were new back then. I think it helped him love the job even more. He would study the -1 and factory documents to see how he could better use the systems. Coming from F89s and F-101Bs he said he'd used the 111 radar in an air-to-air mode. Being lead nav for the squadron sent to S Korea for Paul Bunyan he said he was able to find their tanker off Alaska with the radar. "I was about to call the alternate (land), but clouds finally opened up and we saw it." (He said he'd never commit to the tanker solely on radar paint in the 111. Be a disaster if were a mistake.) He loved it so much, wish he could do it all over again, but he's 87 now.
If I recall correctly it's called "Bang-Bang" guidance and is probably called that after the noise the system makes as it moves.
@@Parabueto you are correct. The bang is when the fins hit the full deflection stop.
@@sharizabel2582 If cost was not a concern, do you think that the GBU-24 would have been better suited for that task than the PW2 series?
@@agostonbazmajer1100 that is a thought provoking question. The answer is “it depends.” The variable is where the jet is when the weapon is employed which impacts the angle of the weapon versus the laser line of sight to the weapon. A low angle in general would cause a shallow approach to the target which inevitably creates lose of energy. Lower energy gets you less penetration of the target and a lower chance of successfully destroying the target. A PW III package allows for biases that maintains a good portion of that energy especially in low altitude employment. A medium altitude employment maintains more of the energy even with a PW II package. Remember to the fighter pilot the goal isn’t or shouldn’t necessarily be the killing of the armor crew but the armor itself. So seeing them run to safety and seeing the armor destroyed is a win. By the way a GBU-24 is a specific size, 2000 pound, bomb with the PW III guidance package. Mating a 500 pound with a PW II package “creates” a GBU-12. Remember that the larger the weight and size of a weapon generally means fewer number in the jets load. Hope that helps.
One of the most awesome, underrated planes of the USAF, screaming by kicking up dust. One even got a maneuvering kill against a Mig in Iraq!
As it happens it was an unarmed electronic warfare variant, too, an EF-111. Also, one minor correction, the kill was against a Mirage F1, not a MiG.
That was the "Spark-Vark" variant
@@wraith444 How did it get a kill unarmed? Aircraft kung-fu?
@@noth606 The Raven got down to ground level which is an advantage and the Mirage followed and eventually got too low and slammed into the ground.
the EF-111 Raven tricked the Iraqi Mirage into playing low on the deck he did a hit the brakes he will fly right pass but the Mirage flew right into the side of a sand dune.
Such an amazing aircraft, one of the best we have had in service here in Australia. They would routinely train out here at extremely low levels, quite often over the hilly terrain in the country NSW area where I grew up. To hear one screaming your way, and then looking up to see such a big, fast moving aircraft flying over you so low that you could sometimes see the crew in the cockpit if they were banking the right way, was really exciting stuff.
I started my career at Kendell Airlines in Wagga around 2000 and one time the F111s did a training run on the airport. We all gathered airside to watch. We heard an aircraft from one direction but that turned out to be reflected off a hanger and it came rocketing over us from behind, over the runway, and off over the hills. Then about 10 seconds later a second one came thundering along the runway to do the inspection pass and then they were both off presumably to Amberly. It was fantastic!
Ditto for Townsville. Would go to the fence of the RAAF base to watch them taking off. Then there was the sky shows and the F-111 dump'n'burn.
Sitting out on a deck at Thredbo up the mountain when a F111 flew past up the valley at our level doing a roll. I’ll never for get that. Amazing.
I have about 1200 hours in the right seat of the' Vark, so I have a soft spot in my heart for the old bird. If you added modern engines, and modern electronics, this beast could have been absolutely amazing. The "F" model was the cream of the crop -- I loved flying in that one!
Good show.. I also have a soft spot for it I think it was a beautiful piece of engineering like a Ferrari.
I was disappointed to see her go especially when she had performed her roles so well.
I also think that with upgrades she would have been a very capable aircraft for decades to come.
Look at the B52 .. still flying and expected to fly for a few decades more.
@@jiggsborah7041 the RAAF retired them in 2010, and that was pushing their dates a bit. We got some use out of Em.
@@daynecee683 ...Ive watched a few documentaries about the RAAF F111s.
They seem to have been popular. I'm not a military man just an old man who grew up mad about aircraft and I built many models back in the day.
You know how it is building models. You look at the lines and mate I can tell you that the aardvark has a beautiful shape. If Da Vinci had designed aircraft he would have made the F111...
It's beautiful... so graceful...like a Ferrari.
Keep well and God bless
@@jiggsborah7041 I got the privilege of seeing one up close at RAAF Amberley in their aviation museum, and I didn’t realise how massive they are either. They’re an amazing aircraft, and really are beautiful. I’m kind of the new generation of aviation enjoyer, just getting into it, and still quite young at 17. Hope to pick up some more models in the future. Awesome to hear from your opinions and experiences. Have a good one.
@@daynecee683 you too... think about a flying career. I hear flying fighters is the most fun you can have AND get paid to do it.
Have fun and God bless 👍👍👍💕
The video thumbnail doesn't match the content. Everything you said about the F111 other than some of the problems with the early variants indicates it was actually a very good aircraft with a successful military career.
I had heard the term Aardvark well before their retirement, but we Aussies called them the pig, mostly because they kept their nose close to the ground, but they were a lot of work to keep flying. Fuel tank deseal/reseal, the wing pivot point, and a dodgy Spratt and Shitney engine. Extremely capable when working. The 24 F18Fs have about a quarter of the ability of the 24 F111s they replaced, especially range.
But the F-18s are more maneuverable, better technology and better accuracy.
Australia buried the F-111 in the desert 🏜
@@AshMundo not the desert, the tip at swanbank
Glenn, you made my day with your "Spratt and Shitney engine" comment! The TF-30s brought down more Aardvarks AND Tomcats than all enemy forces combined!
@@johndemeritt3460 I agree! Imagine how much better the Vark would have done with a better engine like the F110 or F135!
I'll take your word on why auusies called them "pigs" but aardvark means "earth pig" in Dutch and Afrikaans.
I have lived close to Amberly in Australia for most of my life where for many years 24 F111s lived. The general population here had a love affair with them. Seeing them in our skies everyday. The did their dump and burn at any event we had. We lost a couple tragically. Shorty and a very young pilot who crashed in Tenterfield NSW. Because I lived close to Amberly I just marvelled at them. Yes they were big and heavy. Cadillac of the sky was another name we had for them, but man were they fast. Of course they could not move like a f22 raptor but they were like a bullet at low level. And aside from all that we loved our f111s. When the super hornet came along to replace them you know what they did to them. Put them on trucks and buried them at the local dump ??? wings off. That was gut wrenching to watch.
The pictures of them being buried breaks my heart. They were always my favourite at airshows. The Pig was a beautiful bird!
Destroying the F-111s, instead of storing them indefinitely, was one of the silliest decisions the ADF ever made.
The reason for that is because the Vark's airframe has toxic material, and in accordance with our government, the RAAF had to bury all of their remaining airframes.
As part of SALT talks Americans promised the Soviets that the FB111s would be cut up at end-of-life. Some of the Aussie air-frames were gifted ex-FB111s so they had to be cut up at their retirement. At least so I heard.
I live at Yamanto been living here for 40 years my dad was a airframe mechanic at Amberley back in the day when we had the mirage III and F4 phantom and he sore them being deliver'd here at Amberley the is a full shell out the font south gate and one fully decked out mines engine in the museum inside i loved the dump and burn at river fire and sat in the cockpit when i was a teenager when i could stroll on the base and go to the movies for a dollar but omg F_ _ _ you Johnny Howard with your dumb ass screw us for 30 years FA-18 piece of crap that they are 1/3 the top speed twice as load as the F-111 and can not even make it to Tindal with out external tanks and a refuel ? i mean come on our RAAF F-111's in the Gulf War with the RAF Tornado's hit more target's and tanks than the US with there F-15/16's,A-10's,Apache's and Cobra's and the so called F-117stealth fighter that really is a bomber, in Fact i beleave the RAAF's No.1 and No.6 Sqd's hold the top bombing in the World at presession/speed and firepower for several years www.raafamberleyheritage.gov.au/
Sucks? Lazerpig would like a word with you.
I'd love to see a Lazerpig video on the F-111
@@Robdog_1996 It's only a matter of time.
The Australian F111's were well served for the RAAF and an excellent strike aircraft
Yes it served well, the Indonesian were certainly worried about the aircrafts capabilities.
Hard to forget seeing the F-111 doing a Dump and Burn runs through Brisbane during Riverfire.
They have one of the former RAAF F-111's at the HAR's aviation museum in Wollongong. The kids loved sitting in the cockpit.
Flying between apartment buildings during the car races at Surfers Paradise.
It was Australia's first strategic weapon.
It stopped the possibility of our worst nightmare - a ground war in Asia, against Indonesia.
With East Timor on the edge, the Indonesian Foreign Minister told Cabinet, which includes their top military, "Australia can put a bomb through that window and onto this table". He won the debate (phew).
Deterrence works.
Nb. Menzies had said in 63 "I want a plane that can drop a nuke on Jakarta". Had exactly that deterrent effect when we needed it.
Indonesians are mostly nice people. Nuking them would have been a real shame. They're the largest Muslim country in the world (?) and mostly good neighbours. Menzies was not always a good bloke.
@@cmw9876 ??? We never even got a nuke. The primary idea of a military is preventing war. That plane was the perfect weapon. It never shot in anger.
It saved a lot of Indonesian lives.
I reject the premise of the video's thumbnail - The F-111 was fan-f*ckin-tastic (once they figured out what to actually do with it).
EDIT: Also, why in the hell is this NOT part of the Ace Combat 7 roster?
The F-14 was called "Tomcat" long before Tom Cruise was associated with it. The name is a reference to Adm Tom Connolly's involvement in the plane's development.
I was gonna say, that can't be right.
I’m sure he was being funny when he said that
Ah yes, sarcasm is very hard to understand from a notoriously famous sarcastic TH-camr.
@@MinistryOfMagic_DoM we all know the animal was named after the plane 😳🤣💀🤣
It was a joke
A little disappointed that no mention was made of the Raven crew getting a terrain kill during Desert Storm. Then again, electronic warfare doesn't get much love in general.
Well Chrome Dome you are really late to the party. It first flew 57 yrs ago, entered service with USAF in 1967 served until 1986, almost 20 yrs. F-111s participated in the Gulf War (Operation Desert Storm) in 1991. During Desert Storm, F-111Fs completed 3.2 successful strike missions for every unsuccessful one, better than any other U.S. strike aircraft used in the operation. The group of 66 F-111Fs dropped almost 80% of the war's laser-guided bombs, including the penetrating bunker-buster GBU-28. Eighteen F-111Es were also deployed during the operation. The F-111s were credited with destroying more than 1,500 Iraqi tanks and armored vehicles. Their use in the anti-armor role was dubbed "tank plinking". Ref. Wiki.
Having grown up just west of RAAF Amberley (largest Air Force Base in the Southern Hemisphere and potentially a good one for Geographics), F-111's were an almost everyday sight. Playing sport alongside pilots I heard some incredible stories about this incredible aircraft. They maintained you'd never lived until you'd gone 250ft, hard (the most aggressive setting for their TFR) at Mach 2.
You can't do Mach 2 at 250 feet agl.
I was working on the top of a coal silo at Tarong Power Station in Queensland in early 1990's when I was "attacked" by an F111 doing a training bombing run. The terrain was low rolling hills and the F111 was following the terrain at very low altitude. I heard nothing as it approached and only looked up after it had passed overhead and disappeared with a roar.
I have always said if I had my choice of any USAF aircraft I would want to be in an EF-111. Cooking supersonic right above the deck with terrain following radar. Gnarly assignment. Those pilots were dawgs
the EF-111 was the electronic warfare jet used for radar jamming and probably dont have the terrain following radar.
I hero worshipped them as a teenager in the 70s. Wow.. it was the height of technology those days and to fly so low and so fast took balls mate
@@bobthompson4319 if I remember correctly I believe they do have it, and it was used very effectively on jam-SAM sorties in Desert Storm
@@bobthompson4319 the EF-111 was often used in direct support of strike packages because of its terrain-following radar.
EF-111As were restricted to under Mach 1.1 due to frame cracking in the 1990s. They did have TFR, though. It just wasn't really used after 1991 as the EF went from leading strike flights to jamming at a distance. I worked on them in the early 90s as they were being retired. I miss working on them, even if they were maintenance pigs.
It was actually a medium bomber.......... that could shoot down enemy fighters. Biggest advantage was being able to fly low & fast, which enemy fighters radars couldn't find from the ground clutter. F-11's could carry a gun & air to air missiles to shoot down fighters & a weapons bay that could deliver anything in the inventory up to & including nukes.
Like Karl G I also flew the F-111 - F-111Ds and Fs at Cannon AFB, NM (then onto the greatest airplane ever, the A-10, for 15 years). One thing I want to point out is almost all the problems the Vark had were generated by the USN! The USN insisted on side-by-side seating - the USAF ALWAYS used tandem seating for it's fighters. This drove a wider fuselage, creating more weight and drag, therefore more fuel to meet the required design specs, therefore more weight. All of these things decreased aerial performance AND led to the F-111 not passing carrier quals so the USN didn't even buy it!! Notice how the F-14 took the F-111 wing design AND engines but used tandem seating. Not a coincidence. All that said for the mission - interdiction and nukes - the F-111 was awesome. And freaking fast.
Well said. I was at Cannon from 76-82 and then from 90-00
Well said.
Grew up close to cannon AFB. Watched them fly and do touch and gos often. Lovely birds. Loved to have flown, was my ambition until my vision went to hell.
Very interesting... Great post.
Imagine you're a crew chief on an F111 and on takeoff one of the landing gear just falls the hell off. Unless the pilots caused it from not retracting them fast enough and causing the failure from over speeding the landing gear can you imagine the crew chief on that plane trying to come up for a reasonable reason for it. I mean talk about an oh shit moment lol.
my grandfather flew one of the first F-111s for Australia and my dad would always tell me this story about how the RAAF was debating how useful the F-111 were and if they should be taken out of service so my grandfather went and took his plane and targeted the desk in the office of one of the commanders who was arguing against keeping the F-111s in service and sent him the recording of it. i never actually believed him until he pulled out this old air force book that reported on the actual event and had photos
Now that might have been the flight that targeted the Russel Defence Offices in Canberra. Apparently had the crosshairs right on the office of the "decision makers".
This plane got screwed over by the reformist pretty bad. JUSTICE FOR MA BOY!!!
Fellow ncd boy
@@hardtanker7522 NCD?
The F-111 gets a far worse Rep than it deserves. Sure it wasn’t very good at fighter roles, and failed the Navy’s requirements.
But it’s performance as a Bomber/Electronic warfare aircraft was invaluable. And the 111 was loved by most of it’s crews.
I was stationed at Pease AFB, Portsmouth New Hampshire. We had FB-111s. The Strategic Bomber version of the F-111. Lord they were screamers. Watching them take off with those TF30 engines on full afterburner was amazing. The shockwaved flames was longer than the Ardvark itself. We got so many complaints from the civilian population because of the noise.
I worked at airshows all over new england late 70s to 90s, you could always count on a pair of FBs from Pease making a surprise appearance popping up 200 ft just off the showline. Demonstrating TFR with a bus pulled across the runway was always a crowd pleaser.
Were you at Pease when we earned the Presidential Unit Citation for setting a bombing accuracy of 100%?
@@WilliamEades_Frostbite unfortunately no, but I do remember hearing about it, was it 1980?
My dad was stationed at Pease from 72-76. We lived on base, he was a crew chief at the time. It’s where I got my appreciation for the FB-111.
Had a supervisor who was an F-111 pilot and was in the Persian Gulf War in ‘91. They knocked most of the tanks out and called it “tank plinking”. Said when you were flying supersonic at low level with the terrain following radar on it was a rush like no other and no other aircraft could do that at the time (and most still can’t). Surprised this feature wasn’t talked about more in the video. One of main reasons why F-111 was successful.
While at Cannon AFB, I witnessed a simulated attack from a pair of F-111Ds...500mph at 200 feet.
It knocked us to the ground. Very impressive!
Melrose range ?
@BobHoover-kl6zm Not Melrose Range. At CAFB during an ORI. The F-111s were flying runway heading (runway 22) and using my PAR radar as his aiming point.
From Australia here. Our farm had an airstrip on in for agricultural purposes. When I was a kid, an F111 tried to make an emergency landing on our strip. It didn't make it. I can still remember driving around with my father looking for parts. I must have been 8 yeas old or so..
I live near Amberley and i use to love seeing them flying around. The F18's are still cool, but the F1-11's were just something else. And of there's the dump and burns..
Growing up in western Sydney, I use to hear, and sometimes see these flying out from Richmond Airbase. Such an iconic plane, and even though they are now retired, they're still my favourite
Same here, an awesome aircraft.
Meanwhile a bunch of luddites are trying to tell us that the slow friendly fire machine (the A-10) is better, pretty purely on the basis of memes.
No they are telling you this because the people on the ground or call for CAS want it. The great Apache has higher incidents of friendly fire than the A10. And because of those friendly fire incidents they improved the A10 to have 2nd best ground attack radar in the airforce.
Well unlike you I actually flew BOTH A/C (1300 hrs F-111D/F, 2500 hrs A-10) and the A-10 is "better" at it's mission. The F-111 is better at the interdiction mission. The old A-10A of desert storm is loooooong gone and the "new" A-10C has all new avionics, HMCS, GPS, targeting pod, etc, etc and is, by far, the most lethal fighter in the inventory. The desert storm A-10A used a MANUAL bomb site - NO INS or GPS or computer aiming cues. In the F-111 at the time we had a computerized CCIP system helping us. So apples to oranges comparison
Never mind all the technicalities. It is just super cool and fast! One of the first to have all weather capability, early variable geo wings that lead to the F-14 wing design. Its size, speed, and huge payload makes it almost a strategic bomber, super cool camo paint jobs. Plus, an escape pod! C'mon who doesn't love an escape pod? Just on looks alone Its been one of my favorite aircraft since Iv'e first seen a pic of it. But then again I love anything that has to do with military aviation. I always love seeing it at the Wright Patterson AF museum. I have taken my Daughter (She is a Tech Sgt in the AF now) there when she was a kid, and last summer took her again with my Grandson. Just last month we saw another F-111 Aardvark at the AF Museum near Omaha, NE.
I loved this plane the first time I saw it too.
I was a bomb loader on F-111F's at RAF Lakenheath from Dec. 1984 - Dec. 1987, and on F-111D's at Cannon AFB, NM from Jan. 1988 - July 1991. Lakenheath was just finishing up the Pave Tack conversions when I arrived. I was originally assigned to the 548th TFS, switching to the 48th about halfway through my tour. I loaded three of the aircraft that participated in El Dorado Canyon. We were having exercises (wargames) that week, and normally during wargames, we load the bombs, then almost immediately take them down. In this case, it was nearing the end of my 12-hours, and my load crew, as well as several others, loaded the aircraft, and left the bombs loaded. Came back in the next morning with my wife (it was payday, so she was doing the banking and shopping while I was working), and waited on the flightline for the returning aircraft. The count up up short by a couple of aircraft, and it wasn't long before we were told that one was lost and the other had engine issues and diverted to Spain.
So, that and the fact that RAF Mildenhall, another US base, was about 5-7 miles away, and they had a pair of SR-71's, which we could see taking off every so often.
At Cannon, I started out inshop, doing maintenance on the weapons pylons and computers, and other stuff related to keeping the bombs where they belonged, until they were to be dropped. Spent a year there, then moved to the 27th TFW load shop, where I was back to putting things that go BOOM onto planes. It was an interesting time to be sure, but the -111D's were a bigger pain in the ass to work than the F's. We once fried over a million dollars in weapons computers because some oddball voltage from avionics was getting into our systems. When we'd replace the parts, we'd run checks, and they'd all be fine. Then the C-Shoppers would start their checks and fry our stuff. After a couple weeks of tracing wires and troubleshooting we found out that their equipment was sending 24VDC to systems that only needed 4VDC.
My last month at Cannon was spent inside one of the hangars painting a huge-ass mural on the inside of the hangar doors. It was a nice image of an F-111 coming straight at you, dropping a GBU-10 laser guided bomb. The full mural was 19 feet high and 27 feet wide. Interestingly enough, the whole time I was working on it, there was a hangar queen in there. Hangar queens are aircraft that either can't be fixed, or will take an exceptionally long time to fix. In this case, it was the former. The plane had been involved in a bird-strike - well, actually, multiple bird strikes. The aircraft flew through a flock, and I think they counted about 7 or 8 individual hits. The nose radome was hanging in shreds when it landed, with the main radar and TFR radar trashed. Some bird remains were found deep in the aircraft BETWEEN the engines, and one bird struck the forward canopy, flexed the plexiglas/perspex enough to slide under the framing and splatter on the circuit breaker panel between the pilot and WSO's heads.
Ummm... this got a bit long, so I guess I'll stop now. I much preferred the F's to the D's, but either was great to work on after the stories I heard about working weapons on F-4's.
Cool episode! Just FYI; the F-14 Tomcat was named to pay tribute to Admiral Thomas F. Connolly (keeping in 'Cat-tradition' i.e.: Bearcat, Tigercat, Hellcat ect.) Tom Cruise was never consulted, probably because he was 6 years old at the time.
It was actually the second time Grumman went for "Tomcat" as the nickname for one of their fighters, just the first time the Navy let them use it. The F7F Tigercat was originally going to be the Tomcat, but the 1940s Navy thought the name was "too sexual".
The side-by-side seating and crew capsule were USN requirements: Side-by-side seating to allow the pilot to see the radar and the capsule to give the crew a floating life pod if ejection occurred over water. These were subsequently jettisoned in the development of the F-14.
The Navy had already used that layout with the A-6.
And for a fleet interceptor, their 1950s concept of the F6D Missileer (which never got to the prototype stage, but was the origin of what would eventually become the F-111B and F-14's AN/AWG-9 radar and AIM-54 Phoenix missile) also called for that layout.
When I was a kid I bought this model kit thinking it was an F-14 and I’ve been a fan ever since. No good reason, I just think it’s a cool looking plane. :)
You could slap a pair of truck nuts on it, it's so butch looking.
The F-111 legacy has always confused me. In terms of being a multi-role attack aircraft, the F-111's service record suggest it should be considered among the very best in history. The Panavia Tornado is one of the darlings of this type and the F16 has an almost mythical reputation.
Sure it had problems but overall, the F-111 seems to have a success record that designers dream of their designs having.
And yet there are some who suggest it was utter garbage. It was no air-to-air fighter but the idea of a one-size-fits-all aircraft is something very few actually meet (arguably the F-16 is one of the few that is able to do everything), and it's service record and longevity show that this was a very versatile and useful aircraft, so I'm always confused why it has such strong detractors?
Stop writing about aircraft. You have no clue WTF you are talking about! This plane did not suck, in fact it became the best interdictor aircraft ever made, probably still is, I don't think that right now anywhere in the world there exists an aircraft (that is still in service) that can match it's low level speed, endurance and payload capabilities. Just during the Vietnam war each F-111A could carry twice the payload of an F-4 Phantom over 2.5 times the range and the USAF acknowledged the aircraft as being the most cost effective employed throughout the conflict.
My dad loaded weapons on F-111's at RAF Upper Heyford and Mountain Home AFB, ID for 13 years. I love the plane.
Was in the 429ecs ef-111a was a beast at what it did. and we retired them in 98 not 96 at Cannon AFB
I was the resource advisor for that squadron until they retired the planes.
The EF-111 was pretty damn good at electronic warfare, specifically flying low and punching holes in air defense coverage for others...which is why they were retired so late.
My dad was an EWO on EF-111s out of Mountain Home AFB, he loved that plane.
When I was there they had the call sign "Ghost".
They just brought in the EF models at Upper Heyford right before I left...Great to hear they used them in Libya
People... When most people are still stuck in ww1 and ww2 fighter bomber roles and stupid fighter combat, then People cant see what the fat bombers and lazy fighters are carrying that make them so awesome. F111 and the F-14 had long range radar for their era better than any enemy meaning seeing them and attacking before being seen, and n the case of the F14 also having a missile that was so modern that India and china are just catching up. F111 could hold a lot of Anti ship missiles much like the Russian mach2 Tupulov shooting in a group over 200-300 anti ship missiles into a group of ships and going back at Mach 2 to reload after firing missiles from an enormous range... The F111 could also do this same sorte and did. Awesome. Which is why old planes are still used even if they have no speed.. their missiles do..
The F-111 was the first penetration aircraft ever before anything Stealth was thought of! Yes flying at Mach 1 at 250 ft above the ground is awesome!!! Only the B-1B was doing this when the Vark was retired, the only problem the Varks had was it was not maintenance friendly and high maintenance hours to turn them around in a high pace situations, but if the AF would bring them back with better engines and avionics she would still fly circles around most newer fighters, even the stealth fighters couldn't shoot them down because the Varks low level flying and the impossibly to fly behind them to gain a lock with radar for an air to air missile system! Stealth who needs stealth with a Vark!
The F-111s used to do a "Dump And Burn" over Brisbane CBD every year. I miss that and the practice runs they did on a Friday lunchtime. My wife was hanging out washing one Friday, heard something, looked up and there was an F-111 very low immediately overhead on the way to the City. I have a soft spot for these things and visit the static one over at Amberley whenever I pass.
Yeah me too, an F-111 made me face plant back in the early 2000's.
Was fishing south of Goanna Headland on Anzac Beach, which was part of the Bundjalung Bombing Range.
Yeah I know we should not have been there but the fish were biting so what can ya do.
Well the Flyboys gave us a subtle hint to bugger off. An F-111 at about 200 feet at better than Mach 1.
Saw a shadow, was face down in the surf. Never even heard the thing.
End result, Some of our fish we BBQ'd for the FlyBoys. (Yeah we got off light)
I remember a lot of people being pretty unhappy when their retirement was announced.
@@petert3355 Nice story!
The 111 was developed at the beginning of the spiraling cost era of these huge programs. This is when fighter jets became huge multi-role platforms that took a decade to fully develop, and also, during huge inflation cycles. It's service life proved out the concepts, and it was a sort of the D.H. Mosquito of the late century.
My Dad flew multiple models of the F-111 after graduation from USAFA in the class of 1970. AMA and I will try to relay the questions to him and get the answers. Also, the F-111 is still the fastest low level aircraft in history, but that is an UNOFFICIAL record.
Yep. the FAI binned the low level air speed record so the F-111 and Tornado F Mk 3 couldn't attempt to do it officially (BAe were going to attempt it until they found out it wouldn't be ratified).
One of the "problems" with the F-111 was its excellent terrain following mode. The radar for that locked the plane in less than 100 feet off the ground and could, in full afterburn, maintain that over virtually any terrain. It would take you down the canyon and up the other side.
The problem is that the pilot still needs control and authority. When he grabs the stick, the plane needs to do what he tells it to do because there are concerns above and beyond terrain following. So, the avionics will yield control of an aircraft flying nearly 400 meters per second to a human being flying less than 35 meters off the ground with any control input.
Imagine being a pilot inside that airplane, hurtling toward obstacles and pulling up at the last moment. Do you trust it? Or what are your autonomic responses - tensing up or reflexively moving your hands/arms?
This is why pilots were told to sit on their hands for a hard ride - because the avionics would yield control before the pilot had a chance to realize he was ten feet into the side of a mountain, let alone in control of the plane.
But how do you get adrenaline junkie, control freaks that are often pilots to give up flying the plane to a machine?
That, and the aircraft was underpowered. It really should have gotten the same upgrade the F-14 did... well, kinda did.
There were big problems with the f-111 for sure! However it didn't suck as much as you're letting on.
It hit it's stride in the end. There were very few aircraft developed that didn't have some big issues.
I seem to remember that Australia did pretty well with their Aardvarks, making life hell for the Americans during the annual air defence exercises.
😁
The first time I ever heard of the F-111 was from the El Dorado mission to bomb Libya. Moammar Khaddafi had supported terrorists and allowed training camps in his country, so Reagan and Thatcher punished him for it. The lonnnnng flight was because neither France nor Spain would allow the planes through their airspace to go to Libya. So, with in-flight refueling they had to fly all the way around Spain and enter the Mediterranean through the narrow international space in the Straits of Gibraltar. One of the F-111's "accidentally" dropped a bomb on the French embassy in Tripoli, no doubt to express dissatisfaction with France's lack of support for punishing terrorists.
🥴
France has a very long history of not supporting anyone. In WW2, several troops escaped from the Philippines and made a long boat trip to French Indochina (Vietnam) the French greeted them and then turned them over to the Japanese.
@@stevenbass732 Those would've been Vichy French turning over Free French fighters. Completely different circumstances.
@@GrinderCBThey were American soldiers. During the Vietnam war, a pilot and his WSO were shot down over Hanoi and managed to evade capture and made it to the French embassy. The French fed them, had their medics check them over, then turned them over to the NVA.
@@stevenbass732 your initial reply said WW2, then you said the Vietnam War. Please get your facts straight. In WW2 French Indochina was controlled by the Vichy French, therefore it makes sense they'd turn over enemies to the Japanese. During Vietnam the French were officially neutral and it might've provoked a diplomatic incident if they'd hidden Americans from the North Vietnamese. In any case the French earned a lot of animosity from Americans over their refusal to support us, including the F-111 mission to bomb targets in Libya.
One great thing in the ejection capsule according to my dad who was an EWO (Electronic Warfare Officer) on EF-111 Ravens was the full survival equipment pack, food, water, cold weather gear, survival rifle, and more. Only problem my dad said was that the survival rifles tended to “disappear” into the hands of unscrupulous ground crews.
As an Aussie kid I will always remember the dump and burn technique the RAAF used to do at the Grand Prix. You could feel the heat of it. A complete waste of Jet-A1 but spectacular none the less.
There is a beautifully restored F111 in the Air Force Armaments Museum at Elgin AFB in Florida.
Watched one of these crash near Mildenhall , 1977. Then we flew over the capsule, in a C-9, to locate it for the crash crew. Crew was fine, and by pure coincidence, the AC was one of my instructors in pilot tng, 3 yrs earlier.
The best man for my wedding flew the Lybian raid, part of the airfield strike. I've got a bunch of 111 stories, including first and last day of Gulf War
That raid was a clinic in strike missions studied worldwide esp. by the USSR.
The one F-111 lost during Lybian campaign was supposedly due to a bomb that did not release successfully, and upon banking to turn eventually released struck the aircraft and detonated.
Probably not
@@BilgePump
The best intel about what happened is that Karma 52 flew into the water. Into the Gulf of Sidra. It is not the most heroic death, making a pilot error while attempting to dodge enemy defenses, so what you will typically see is that stories get told for the purpose of making everyone feel better:
- 'They got shot down.'
- 'Flames were seen before their jet hit the water.'
From the best info available, as far as I know, those stories are unsubstantiated. If flames were observed, then I want to hear it straight from the person who saw it. But I've never seen that person (those people) named. I've never heard one single eye-witness testimony.
Now just because I haven't heard anyone, it doesn't mean that there isn't someone out there who swears by this story as to what happened to them. But I don't see how that could be verified. The proof is resting on the bottom of the ocean. Examine the wreckage, and then we would have a definitive answer.
I was stationed at RAF Upper Heyford (which is no longer an airbase) from 1975-1977 in the UK. F111s were our main function so it was lots of quonset huts each with a nuclear-armed f111 ready to take off at a moment's notice. It was an amazing aircraft. There used to be a video on youtube of 2 crew flying close to the ground at high speed (something they were designed to do I believe) and it was pretty wild. During training alerts, the aircraft was made to taxi around in a procession to show that they could function called an "elephant walk". How does this apply to Aardvark...um, nothing. I just wanted to share.
Great memories of Heyford! I was there in 88-89 though.
82-84 CES. Firefighter
Why does the F111 suck? Because it has two f*cking powerful turbines, they'll suck alright.
Well, I mean it is jet powered...isn't it kind of *supposed* to suck? 😂
I was stationed at Plattsburgh AFB in the late 70’s there was always a half dozen or so 111’s sitting on the flight line ready to go. Fully loaded with nukes. Along with a couple of electronic jammers. ☮️
380th AMS, Automatic Test Stations shop, 1973-1977
Stationed at Pburgh in late 80’s. Did nuclear generations, took them off alert and then retired them. Many were transferred to TAC and Australia
No mention of the SRAM.
This video needs to be redone.
So many errors. One nuke in the weapons bay? Simon was half right.
I was on a project in Plattsburgh a couple years ago. They have a B-58 and a F-111 still on display at the gates.
@@duanesamuelson2256 They have an FB-111A and a B-47 on display.
I did in-shop avionics repair on FB-111A aircraft at Plattsburgh AFB, NY from 1973-1977. Specialized in the Inertial Navigation, Doppler and Attack RADAR, and Astral Navigation (Astrotracker) systems. The bombing accuracy on these was phenomenal. I saw a photo from the bombing range at a morning maintenance meeting where the (wooden practice) bomb was leaning against the 'ground zero' marker pole, with it's parachute draped over the top of the pole. Was sorry to see them phased out - they were definitely state-of-the art for their time.
I remember their jetwash knock tree limbs down around my ears a couple of times in 1985, when I was a teenager, working on my brother's logging crew in the Adirondacks.
As I recall, the FBs became the G models. Went to Cannon, if I recall correctly. Then they went to the Boneyard.
@@adirondacker007 lots of stories about FBs out of PAFB flying UNDER the Crown Point bridge (a bridge across Lake Champlain) at just under Mach. Wonder if that's the real reason the bridge was declared unsafe and had to be replaced? Couldn't handle the repeated stresses of supersonic aircraft flying under it?
@@mikepowers8607 wouldn't surprise me.
Beautiful looker in my opinion. I remember an Aussie airforce pilot saying to fly one at low altitude and at high speed with the terrain following radar activated was terrifying. But he was still alive to say so! I think our airforce was the last to still use them because their exceptional long range suits us.
Nor would the Americans sell this amazing aircraft to any country except Australia. I don't know if this was because no one else would take them on or because they were so advanced. We lost a few in service but they were much loved by the Aussie population.
Two crews were lost during the initial deployment, not three. The crashes were determined to be caused by broken actuator rods in the stabilator section and not wing hydraulic failure. I was a member of that first deployment.
The Australia Air Force would sometimes fly F111 to New Zealand, fly around in the mountains then fly home again (without landing or refueling).
XD
Just to cause a stir to our little brother.
You seem surprised that a fighter/bomber would use a tailhook to make an emergency landing on a runway. All US fighter planes have tailhooks and all US military airfields have arrestor wires installed at each end of the runway. This is to facilitate a safe emergency landings in the event of damage or system failure on an aircraft. Even civilian airports which are regularly used by military aircraft (typically national guard units) usually have arrestor wires installed.
My cousin worked on the F-111 when he served in the US Air Force and yes it did have his problems especially when it was first developed during the Vietnam War but later on in the Linebacker Raids in 1972 in Vietnam it perform well as well as in the Gulf.
My uncle worked flightline in the Days of Yore when one limped back after a 20 mike mike gun pod malfunction. Pretty catastrophic one that happened underneath the cockpit & killed one of the crew and set fire to an engine. Legendarily told me they were ordered to say it 'crashed'.
Pilot had to fly back from the range with his buddy's body strapped in right next to him. I guess they also had a real issue with the canopy not staying closed and causing fatal crashes, too. 'Frankenvarked' became an official term for F-111's rebuilt from reclaimed crash parts.
When you want to shoot ballistic slugs from the air, this is STILL the best platform.
You see, the wing geometry lends itself to stable, slow flight without a lot of swaying. This makes it ideal for long range machine guns when helicopters are too slow.
At Upper Heyford we lost 6 of these aircraft in 1979 due to accidents. Several hit the terrain in Scotland and one departed, (flat spin) near Cambridge and the escape module saved the crew. The other five crews were killed including one that departed over The Wash and the crew initiated the ejection sequence successfully, but the main parachute deployed early and was immediately burned off by the escape pods main rocket motor. This left the crew stuck in the pod with nothing to do but wait to hit the water. After the 6th loss the Air Force basically fired the Wing Commander and replaced him with Col Tony McPeak. He turned Upper Heyford from being a dark and unhappy place into a very efficient and well-motivated fighting wing that I was privileged to be a part of. I was not surprised that he ended up as the four-star Air Force Chief of Staff 11 years later.
A lot of the technology on this plane went into the making of the F-14, which WAS a fantastic plane, though it too had some issues... But then, All planes do to some degree.